2008 Amendments to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act ...

in the jurisprudence of the United States; relatively few appellate cases on this subject have been
reported.
A nonregistering obligor may assert a wide variety of listed defenses, such as “payment”
or “the obligation has terminated,” in response to allegations of noncompliance with the
registered order. There is no defense, however, to registration of a valid foreign support order.
The nonregistering party also may contest the allegedly controlling order because its terms have
been modified. Or, the defense may be based on the existence of a different controlling order.
See Section 207. Presumably this defense must be substantiated by registration of the alleged
controlling order to be effective.
While subsection (a)(6) is couched in terms that imply the defense to the amount of
alleged arrears can only be that they are less, the converse is also available. For example, if the
registering party is the obligor and asserts an amount of arrears that the obligee believes is too
low, as the nonregistering party the obligee must contest to preclude confirmation of the alleged
amount.
In the absence of a valid defense, if the obligor is liable for current support, the
registering tribunal must enter an order to enforce that obligation. Proof of arrearages must result
in enforcement under the Bradley Amendment, 42 U.S.C. Section 666(a)(10), which requires all
states to treat child-support payments as final judgments as they come due (or lose federal
funding). Therefore, arrearages are not subject to retroactive modification.
Subsection (c) provides that failure to contest a registered order successfully requires the
tribunal to confirm the validity of the registered order.
Related to Convention: art. 26. Procedure on an application for recognition.
SECTION 608. CONFIRMED ORDER. Confirmation of a registered support order,
whether by operation of law or after notice and hearing, precludes further contest of the order
with respect to any matter that could have been asserted at the time of registration.
Comment
If, after notice, the nonregistering party fails to contest, the registered support order is
confirmed by operation of law and no further action by a responding tribunal is necessary.
Although the statute is not explicit on the subject, it seems likely in the absence of a contest both
the registering and nonregistering party would be estopped from subsequently collaterally
attacking the confirmed order, whether on the basis that “the wrong order was registered” or
otherwise.
If contested, a registered support order must be confirmed by the responding tribunal if,
after a hearing, the defenses authorized in Section 607 are rejected. Thus, either scenario
138